The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the effect of removing artificial dental plaque depending on various interdental cleaning products on the interdental surface of zirconia crowns

치간 세정 용품에 따른 지르코니아 크라운 인접면의 인공 치면 세균막 제거 효과

  • Kim, Hyun-Wook (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Song, Ha-Kyung (The Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Park, Eun-Jin (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
  • 김현욱 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 치과보철학교실) ;
  • 송하경 (이화여자대학교 임상치의학대학원) ;
  • 박은진 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 치과보철학교실)
  • Received : 2021.03.02
  • Accepted : 2021.04.26
  • Published : 2021.07.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of this study is to compare five interdental cleansing products' effectiveness on removing artificial dental plaque on the interdental space of zirconia crowns. Materials and methods. A model with abutments on the right mandibular second premolar and first molar were prepared. 10 zirconia crowns for each abutment were fabricated. After applying artificial dental plaque between the zirconia crowns, a single clinician attempted to remove the plaque with five products: interdental toothbrush, end-tuft toothbrush, dental floss, Easypick, Water pik. They were conducted 10 times per group. The aspect and area of removed surfaces were analyzed using images taken with a digital camera. One factor analysis of variance was performed as a statistical analysis, and a post-hoc test was performed using the Scheffé method (P < .05). Results. There were differences in the area and the pattern according to the characteristics of the products. The largest area, including the marginal portion, was removed in the dental floss group. Interdental toothbrush group was the most effective in removing the dental plaque at the marginal portion. Easypick was less effective than the interdental toothbrush. The end-tuft toothbrush showed better results than other products in cleansing mesiobuccal and distobuccal area, but could not cleanse the area directly below the contact point. In Water pik group, artificial dental plaque was scarcely removed. The removal rate of artificial dental plaque was in the order of floss (69.47%), end-tuft toothbrush (49.36%), interdental toothbrush (44.20%), Easy pick (13.04%), and Water pik (0.59%). Conclusion. Dental floss showed the highest removal rate in the interdental space restored with zirconia crowns, while interdental toothbrush was the most effective in removing the dental plaque at the marginal portion.

목적: 다섯 종류의 치간 세정 용품들을 이용하여, 지르코니아 크라운으로 수복된 치아의 치간공간에서 치면세균막 제거 효과의 임상적 차이를 살펴보는 것이다. 재료 및 방법: 하악 우측 제2소구치, 제1대구치 부위에 지대치를 형성한 모형을 제작하고, 두 지대치에 장착할 지르코니아 크라운을 각 10개씩 제작하였다. 인공 치면세균막을 제2소구치 원심면, 제1대구치 근심면에 도포한 후, 1인 실험자가 실제 구강 내에서 사용하는 모습을 재현하여 치간칫솔, 엔드터프트칫솔, 치실, 이지픽, 워터픽으로 군 당 10회 실험하였다. 디지털 카메라로 촬영된 이미지를 이용하여 제거된 양상 및 면적을 분석하였다. 통계 분석으로는 일요인 분산분석을 시행하였고, Scheffé 방법으로 사후검정 시행하였다 (P < .05). 결과: 치간 세정 용품에 따른 인공 치면세균막 제거 양상을 비교한 결과, 용품의 특성에 따라 제거되는 부위와 양상에 차이가 나타났다. 치실에서 변연 경계부를 포함하여 가장 넓은 면적이 제거되었다. 치간칫솔에서는 변연 경계부 위주로 제거가 되었으며, 이지픽은 치간칫솔보다 좁은 부위가 제거되었다. 엔드터프트칫솔은 협설면에서 인접면으로 이행되는 부분이 치간칫솔, 이지픽에 비해서 넓은 부위가 제거된 양상을 보였으나, 접촉점 직하방 부위는 거의 제거되지 않은 양상을 보였다. 워터픽에서는 거의 제거 되지 않은 양상을 보였다. 인공 치면세균막 제거율은 치실(69.47%), 엔드터프트칫솔(49.36%), 치간칫솔(44.20%), 이지픽(13.04%), 워터픽(0.59%) 순으로 나타났다. 결론: 지르코니아 크라운으로 수복된 치간공간에서의 치면세균막 제거율은 치실이 가장 높게 나타났으며, 변연경계부에서의 치면세균막 제거는 치간칫솔이 가장 효과적으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Vagkopoulou T, Koutayas SO, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry: Part 1. Discovering the nature of an upcoming bioceramic. Eur J Esthet Dent 2009;4: 130-51.
  2. Covacci V, Bruzzese N, Maccauro G, Andreassi C, Ricci GA, Piconi C, Marmo E, Burger W, Cittadini A. In vitro evaluation of the mutagenic and carcinogenic power of high purity zirconia ceramic. Biomaterials 1999;20:371-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00182-3
  3. Piconi C, Maccauro G. Zirconia as a ceramic biomaterial. Biomaterials 1999;20:1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00010-6
  4. Suarez MJ, Lozano JF, Paz Salido M, Martinez F. Three-year clinical evaluation of In-Ceram Zirconia posterior FPDs. Int J Prosthodont 2004;17:35-8.
  5. Koutayas SO, Vagkopoulou T, Pelekanos S, Koidis P, Strub JR. Zirconia in dentistry: part 2. Evidence-based clinical breakthrough. Eur J Esthet Dent 2009;4:348-80.
  6. Lebon N, Tapie L, Duret F, Attal JP. Understanding dental CAD/CAM for restorations-dental milling machines from a mechanical engineering viewpoint. Part B: labside milling machines. Int J Comput Dent 2016;19:115-34.
  7. Hamza TA, Sherif RM. In vitro evaluation of marginal discrepancy of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated with different CAD-CAM systems. J Prosthet Dent 2017;117:762-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.011
  8. Meirowitz A, Bitterman Y, Levy S, Mijiritsky E, Dolev, E. An in vitro evaluation of marginal fit zirconia crowns fabricated by a CAD-CAM dental laboratory and a milling center. BMC Oral Health 2019;19: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0701-5
  9. Carrilho Baltazar Vaz IM, Pimentel Coelho Lino Carracho JF. Marginal fit of zirconia copings fabricated after conventional impression making and digital scanning: An in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2020;124:223.
  10. Souza RO, Ozcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, Mesquita AM, Bottino MA. Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthodont 2012;21:94-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00793.x
  11. Nawafleh NA, Mack F, Evans J, Mackay J, Hatamleh MM. Accuracy and reliability of methods to measure marginal adaptation of crowns and FDPs: a literature review. J Prosthodont 2013;22:419-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12006
  12. Jacobs MS, Windeler AS. An investigation of dental luting cement solubility as a function of the marginal gap. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:436-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90239-S
  13. Sorensen SE, Larsen IB, Jorgensen KD. Gingival and alveolar bone reaction to marginal fit of subgingival crown margins. Scand J Dent Res 1986;94:109-14.
  14. Sorensen JA. A rationale for comparison of plaque-retaining properties of crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62:264-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90329-6
  15. Worthington HV, MacDonald L, Poklepovic Pericic T, Sambunjak D, Johnson TM, Imai P, Clarkson JE. Home use of interdental cleaning devices, in addition to toothbrushing, for preventing and controlling periodontal diseases and dental caries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;4:CD012018.
  16. Sarner B, Birkhed D, Andersson P, Lingstrom P. Recommendations by dental staff and use of toothpicks, dental floss and interdental brushes for approximal cleaning in an adult Swedish population. Oral Health Prev Dent 2010;8:185-94.
  17. Lyle DM, Goyal CR, Qaqish JG, Schuller R. Comparison of water flosser and interdental brush on plaque removal: A single-use pilot study. J Clin Dent 2016;27:23-6.
  18. Sharma NC, Lyle DM, Qaqish JG, Schuller R. Comparison of two power interdental cleaning devices on the reduction of gingivitis. J Clin Dent 2012;23:22-6. https://doi.org/10.14399/jacd1999.23.22
  19. Jeong MJ, Cho HA, Kim SY, Kang KR, Lee EB, Lee YJ, Choi JH, Kil KS, Lee MH, Jeong SJ, Lim DS. Effect of ultra-soft and soft toothbrushes on the removal of plaque and tooth abrasion. J Dent Hyg Sci 2018;13: 164-71.
  20. Yost KG, Mallatt ME, Liebman J. Interproximal gingivitis and plaque reduction by four interdental products. J Clin Dent 2006;17:79-83.
  21. Hisanaga R, Shinya A, Sato T, Nomoto S, Yotsuya M. Plaque-removing effects of interdental instruments in molar region. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 2020;61:21-6. https://doi.org/10.2209/tdcpublication.2019-0005
  22. McLean JW, von Fraunhofer JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971;131:107-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4802708
  23. Park CS, Kim YI, Jang SH. A study on the status of recognition, understanding of the use and practical application of oral hygiene devices in dental clinics patients. J Korean Soc Dent Hyg 2009;9:685-98.
  24. Kang BW, Kim KS. Preventive dentistry. 4th ed. Paju; Koonja Pubulishing Inc.; 2012. p. 118-9.
  25. Sharma NC, Lyle DM, Qaqish JG, Schuller R. Comparison of two power interdental cleaning devices on plaque removal. J Clin Dent 2012;23:17-21.